Chamber
Meeting of the Parliament 17 March 2011
17 Mar 2011 · S3 · Meeting of the Parliament
Item of business
Bus Services Regulation
A fortnight ago, we had a by-election in Clydebank—in the Duntocher, Faifley and Hardgate ward. The key issue in that by-election was buses, specifically the number 118. First had proposed to withdraw that service, which runs between Duntocher and Gartnavel hospital via Bearsden. In conjunction with my Labour colleague Councillor Douglas McAllister, I went to see First and made representations to Strathclyde partnership for transport. As a result of those efforts, the Sunday service was reinstated, the evening service was reinstated and we got additional journeys at peak times.
We secured an outcome. It was not necessarily one that met the quality of the previous service—there was still a reduction—but we made a difference. In a sense, that was because we worked with the community. Hundreds of people signed a petition saying that they would no longer be able to get to Gartnavel to visit their relatives. People who worked at the hospital would not be able to get there either. Huge inconvenience would be caused by the withdrawal of service. Those signatures prompted the bus companies to respond by making it clear that there was a proper market for the service if it was properly run and organised, and that people depended on it. We listened to the people who came to speak to us and we acted on their priorities. We got an outcome.
In the by-election a fortnight ago, we were rewarded with 60 per cent of the votes. Our vote went up and the SNP’s vote went down, despite the efforts of Mr Paterson late in the day to involve himself, trying to claim the credit for what he had done, which was the square root of nothing in this instance. I see that he is not present in the chamber this morning for this debate on bus regulation.
We want to ensure that people have a bus to catch. The number 118 is not the only service in my constituency that is under threat. Other services are under threat, too. There are proposals by Glasgow Citybus to withdraw the number 84, which runs from Old Kilpatrick to Gartnavel hospital. The number 11 service is to run only to Clydebank, and not on to Parkhall, so that community will not have access to a key hospital and other services. The people who live in Roman Crescent, in Old Kilpatrick, will no longer be able to get up the hill on the bus, because there will be no bus for them to get on.
The dearth of bus services in those areas is matched by a profusion of bus services in other areas. In Barns Street in Clydebank, which is a narrow residential street, hundreds of buses go down the road every day and the street has had to be chicaned to manage the flow of buses, despite the fact that the most direct route between the Glasgow boundary and Clydebank bus station is a dual carriageway that runs parallel with Barns Street. The bus services all run down Barns Street because they are competing with one another for a relatively limited number of residential customers, although there is a perfectly good road, which would make for quicker journeys and would not lead to such disruption.
No one can say that we have a rational system, when bus operators put on and take off services willy-nilly, without reference to or proper consultation on the needs of communities. On some roads, operators impose too many bus services—more than the community or the roads can bear—because it suits their interests. On top of that, they schedule services to compete with each other. One bus arrives ahead of the next one so, frequently, three or four buses will come down the road at the same time, after which there will be a gap of 15 or 20 minutes, because the bus operators want to compete with each other, rather than meet the needs of the people.
If we are to have competition, we need competition on things that matter to people. Why not have competition on fares? As Charlie Gordon said, the reality is that the monopolies that exist in many towns and the suburban areas that surround them mean that fares increase and are higher than they would be if there were a different system.
Why not have competition on journey time? We are supposed to have that, so why are buses taking so long to get from one part of a city to another? It can take an hour and a half to go from Clydebank to East Kilbride. The journey could be made in less than an hour if the buses took the most direct routes.
Bus deregulation is not working for people. It does not deliver the services that people want in the places that they want them to be. It does not deliver services that go at the speed that people want. Moreover, people are paying over the odds for some services.
That is why we need bus reregulation. We need a system whereby local authorities or other bodies have levers that can force operators to provide services that people want and create barriers to operators taking services away for purely commercial reasons. We need a system in which public service obligations can be imposed. After all, we pay a substantial amount for services, through a variety of means. The operators get significant contributions from the public purse. However, the Government’s attitude appears to be that, ultimately, the market is working, when it patently is not working.
Karen Gillon talked about the 500,000 reasons why the SNP does not support bus reregulation. Rob Gibson said that bus reregulation was not in the SNP’s manifesto in 2007. However, bus reregulation was in the policy paper right up until the point at which Brian Souter’s contribution was announced. In America, they have a name for such relationships between politicians and companies that seek favours and there is a history of such relationships—I am thinking about Lyndon Johnson’s link with Brown and Root and George Bush’s link with the oil companies and Halliburton.
When companies are calling the shots, as Brian Souter appears to be doing in this context, there is an obligation on members of other parties to point out that reregulation is what people want and what the SNP is denying them.
10:29
We secured an outcome. It was not necessarily one that met the quality of the previous service—there was still a reduction—but we made a difference. In a sense, that was because we worked with the community. Hundreds of people signed a petition saying that they would no longer be able to get to Gartnavel to visit their relatives. People who worked at the hospital would not be able to get there either. Huge inconvenience would be caused by the withdrawal of service. Those signatures prompted the bus companies to respond by making it clear that there was a proper market for the service if it was properly run and organised, and that people depended on it. We listened to the people who came to speak to us and we acted on their priorities. We got an outcome.
In the by-election a fortnight ago, we were rewarded with 60 per cent of the votes. Our vote went up and the SNP’s vote went down, despite the efforts of Mr Paterson late in the day to involve himself, trying to claim the credit for what he had done, which was the square root of nothing in this instance. I see that he is not present in the chamber this morning for this debate on bus regulation.
We want to ensure that people have a bus to catch. The number 118 is not the only service in my constituency that is under threat. Other services are under threat, too. There are proposals by Glasgow Citybus to withdraw the number 84, which runs from Old Kilpatrick to Gartnavel hospital. The number 11 service is to run only to Clydebank, and not on to Parkhall, so that community will not have access to a key hospital and other services. The people who live in Roman Crescent, in Old Kilpatrick, will no longer be able to get up the hill on the bus, because there will be no bus for them to get on.
The dearth of bus services in those areas is matched by a profusion of bus services in other areas. In Barns Street in Clydebank, which is a narrow residential street, hundreds of buses go down the road every day and the street has had to be chicaned to manage the flow of buses, despite the fact that the most direct route between the Glasgow boundary and Clydebank bus station is a dual carriageway that runs parallel with Barns Street. The bus services all run down Barns Street because they are competing with one another for a relatively limited number of residential customers, although there is a perfectly good road, which would make for quicker journeys and would not lead to such disruption.
No one can say that we have a rational system, when bus operators put on and take off services willy-nilly, without reference to or proper consultation on the needs of communities. On some roads, operators impose too many bus services—more than the community or the roads can bear—because it suits their interests. On top of that, they schedule services to compete with each other. One bus arrives ahead of the next one so, frequently, three or four buses will come down the road at the same time, after which there will be a gap of 15 or 20 minutes, because the bus operators want to compete with each other, rather than meet the needs of the people.
If we are to have competition, we need competition on things that matter to people. Why not have competition on fares? As Charlie Gordon said, the reality is that the monopolies that exist in many towns and the suburban areas that surround them mean that fares increase and are higher than they would be if there were a different system.
Why not have competition on journey time? We are supposed to have that, so why are buses taking so long to get from one part of a city to another? It can take an hour and a half to go from Clydebank to East Kilbride. The journey could be made in less than an hour if the buses took the most direct routes.
Bus deregulation is not working for people. It does not deliver the services that people want in the places that they want them to be. It does not deliver services that go at the speed that people want. Moreover, people are paying over the odds for some services.
That is why we need bus reregulation. We need a system whereby local authorities or other bodies have levers that can force operators to provide services that people want and create barriers to operators taking services away for purely commercial reasons. We need a system in which public service obligations can be imposed. After all, we pay a substantial amount for services, through a variety of means. The operators get significant contributions from the public purse. However, the Government’s attitude appears to be that, ultimately, the market is working, when it patently is not working.
Karen Gillon talked about the 500,000 reasons why the SNP does not support bus reregulation. Rob Gibson said that bus reregulation was not in the SNP’s manifesto in 2007. However, bus reregulation was in the policy paper right up until the point at which Brian Souter’s contribution was announced. In America, they have a name for such relationships between politicians and companies that seek favours and there is a history of such relationships—I am thinking about Lyndon Johnson’s link with Brown and Root and George Bush’s link with the oil companies and Halliburton.
When companies are calling the shots, as Brian Souter appears to be doing in this context, there is an obligation on members of other parties to point out that reregulation is what people want and what the SNP is denying them.
10:29
In the same item of business
The Presiding Officer (Alex Fergusson)
NPA
Good morning. The first item of business this morning is a Labour Party debate on motion S3M-8177, in the name of Charlie Gordon, on transport.09:15
Charlie Gordon (Glasgow Cathcart) (Lab)
Lab
Our previous full-scale debate on local bus services was way back on 12 June 2008. That is not to say that Labour has not campaigned relentlessly before and ...
Robert Brown (Glasgow) (LD)
LD
I am intrigued by Charlie Gordon’s direction of travel. He complains about market failure, but he seems to be suggesting that he is looking for market monopo...
Charlie Gordon
Lab
Not for the first time, Mr Brown is wrong. If he listens for a bit longer, he will learn.The traffic commissioner continued:“Thus, Edinburgh has Lothian Bus ...
The Minister for Transport and Infrastructure (Keith Brown)
SNP
Will the member take an intervention?
Charlie Gordon
Lab
I am sorry, but I do not have time: maybe later. I pressed Mr Swinney at that meeting by asking:“Are you now saying that the deal that was done”—that was the...
The Minister for Transport and Infrastructure (Keith Brown)
SNP
Today’s debate provides a timely opportunity to discuss the bus industry, assess its current status and consider what improvements can be made to ensure the ...
Karen Gillon (Clydesdale) (Lab)
Lab
What?
Keith Brown
SNP
It is on record.Earlier this year, we agreed changes to the reimbursement rate with the Confederation of Passenger Transport that make the scheme more sustai...
Jackson Carlaw (West of Scotland) (Con)
Con
I was intrigued when news filtered out that Labour was to set aside the whole of this morning’s debate—the last major debate of this parliamentary session—fo...
Patrick Harvie (Glasgow) (Green)
Green
Will the member give way?
Jackson Carlaw
Con
I do not think that I will, today.Scotland’s bus industry is an important private sector contributor to our gross domestic product at a time when there is ar...
Alison McInnes (North East Scotland) (LD)
LD
As Jackson Carlaw said, we have been here before. It is a bit like groundhog day.Charlie Gordon has revisited a proposal that he knows has no majority suppor...
Keith Brown
SNP
Does Alison McInnes acknowledge that the bus route development scheme was not abolished, but was given to local authorities and mainstreamed into their funding?
Alison McInnes
LD
It has been disaggregated to the point at which it is of little value to anyone. It is not enough to roll out new services and it has not been used in that w...
Karen Gillon (Clydesdale) (Lab)
Lab
I thank Jackson Carlaw for his comments, as I have seldom had so many compliments in one speech. However, for the record, I am more of a Cliff Richard girl t...
Stewart Stevenson (Banff and Buchan) (SNP)
SNP
Let me declare a personal interest in the debate: I am a bus card holder. I note that the only bus card holders who are likely to participate in the debate a...
Elaine Smith (Coatbridge and Chryston) (Lab)
Lab
The issue of transport, and in particular buses, is extremely important to people in my constituency and in similar communities throughout Scotland that rely...
Stewart Stevenson
SNP
Will Elaine Smith take an intervention?
Elaine Smith
Lab
No, thank you—Stewart Stevenson had the opportunity as a minister to put guards on the trains.In a transport debate, I cannot miss the opportunity to mention...
The Deputy Presiding Officer (Alasdair Morgan)
SNP
Order. I hope that Elaine Smith will return to buses, which seem to me to be the subject of the motion.
Elaine Smith
Lab
I certainly will, but we need to consider transport in the round to see how important buses are.The number of trains from Coatbridge to Edinburgh on the new ...
Rob Gibson (Highlands and Islands) (SNP)
SNP
For the avoidance of doubt, the question of bus regulation was not ever in the SNP manifesto.In the debate, we are trying to look forward to find ways to ens...
Robert Brown (Glasgow) (LD)
LD
I am grateful to Charlie Gordon for focusing on bus travel in the last party debate before the election. However, as I said in an intervention, there is a co...
Charlie Gordon
Lab
I cited the transport commissioner, who described most of the bus scene in Scotland as a monopoly and near-monopoly city and county arrangement. Does the mem...
Robert Brown
LD
No, I am trying to put the issue into context and to explain the deficiency at the heart of the member’s proposition.I will say a little more about Glasgow. ...
Keith Brown
SNP
Could Robert Brown explain how his party’s policy of doing away with concessionary travel support will help more women to use the buses?
Robert Brown
LD
Perhaps the minister should read the policy. We have certainly said that there is a need to consider whether people such as me are entitled—as Stewart Steven...
Des McNulty (Clydebank and Milngavie) (Lab)
Lab
A fortnight ago, we had a by-election in Clydebank—in the Duntocher, Faifley and Hardgate ward. The key issue in that by-election was buses, specifically the...
Christopher Harvie (Mid Scotland and Fife) (SNP)
SNP
I declare that I am president of the Scottish Association for Public Transport, which has provided a memo for members setting out a useful range of pragmatic...